Chemical degradation of dental CAD/CAM materials.

BACKGROUND: The chemical properties of the oral environment have an appreciable influence on the in vivo degradation of CAD/CAM materials. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to investigate the effect of organic acids, heptane and ethanol (the food-simulating liquids) on CAD/CAM restorative materials. METHODS: Four CAD/CAM materials were selected: (1) 3M ESPE LAVA Ultimate, (2) VITA Enamic, (3) IPS e.max CAD, (4) VITA Suprinity. Seven different samples were fabricated in 15 × 4 × 1.2 mm dimensions from each material (n = 7, N = 140). The materials were conditioned for 7 days at 37 °C as follows: artificial saliva, 75% ethanol, heptane, 0.02 N citric acid, 0.02 N lactic acid in aqueous solution and were tested to obtain flexural strength, surface micro-hardness and wear characteristics. After conditioning, the flexural strength values were assessed using a universal testing machine (1 mm/min crosshead speed) and the fractured samples were used for determination of Vickers hardness values using a digital micro-hardness tester (100 g/10 s) and determination of wear using a chewing simulator. Two factor analysis of variance with interaction model and Tukey's post hoc test were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The highest mechanical property values were found for IPS e.max and VITA Suprinity and the lowest values were found for LAVA Ultimate. Organic acids negatively affected the mechanical properties of e.max CAD and Suprinity. Ethanol and heptane were more effective on LAVA Ultimate and Enamic. There were significant differences among groups (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The mechanical properties of CAD/CAM restorative materials are influenced by food-simulating liquids.

Hydroxyapatite coating effect on the bond strength between CAD/CAM materials and a resin cement.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the bond strength between CAD/CAM materials and a resin cement using hydroxyapatite coating as a surface treatment method. Different surface treatments (Control, no treatment-C; Sandblasting-SB; Hydrofluoric acid etching-HF; applying tooth desensitizer-TeM; applying topical crème-ToM, HAp coating with Pulse Laser Deposition technique-PLD) were applied to three different CAD/CAM materials (LAVA Ultimate, VITA Enamic, and Cerec Blocs). After surface treatments, a universal adhesive (Single Bond Universal, 3M ESPE) was applied and adhesive resin (Rely X Ultimate, 3M ESPE) were cemented on each material surface using plastic tubes (4 mm in diameter). The shear bond strength values were measured using a universal testing machine. Scanning electron microscope analysis were performed to evaluate failure modes and effects of surface treatments. Obtained data were statistically analyzed using two-way ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc test (p = 0.05). The bond strength of PLD groups were significantly higher than other groups in resin-ceramics (p < 0.05). In Cerec Blocs, HF resulted significantly higher bond strength than other groups (p < 0.05). SEM analysis of surface treatment methods (except TeM and ToM) revealed an increase in surface alterations compared to control groups. Failure modes were dominantly adhesive in groups C, TeM, and ToM, whereas mostly mix or cohesive failures were observed in PLD, HF, and SB. Hydroxyapatite coating with PLD technique exhibited promising bond strength results for CAD/CAM resin-ceramics. HAp coating can be used as a replacement for hydrofluoric acid etching and sandblasting in CAD/CAM resin-ceramic materials to obtain better bond strength values.

The Effect of Surface Treatments on the Bond Strength Between CAD/CAM Blocks and Composite Resin.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the microtensile bond strength of three computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) blocks repaired with composite resin using three surface treatment techniques. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Three different CAD/CAM blocks were used in this study: (1) Lithium disilicate, (2) feldspar ceramic, and (3) resin nano ceramic. All groups were further divided into four subgroups according to surface treatment: control, roughened with bur (B); roughened with bur and 5% Hydrofluoric acid (HF); roughened with bur and sandblasting (HF); and roughened with bur and CoJet (C). After surface treatments on each group, a silane and bonding agent were applied, and ceramics were repaired with a nano-hybrid composite. Then, the repaired ceramics were cut with a low-speed diamond saw for microtensile bond testing. Microtensile bond tests for 40 specimens per subgroup were carried out with a universal testing machine. The data were analyzed with ANOVA, Tukey's, and LSD at the 95% significance level. RESULTS: Mean bond strengths (MPa) of subgroups B, HF, S, and C were: 0, 29.8, 0, 23.3 for lithium disilicate ceramic; 26.4, 22.3, 22.4, 22 for feldspar ceramic; 54.8, 25.3, 42.1, 25.7 for resin nano ceramic. For subgroups B and S of lithium disilicate ceramics, bonding failed during specimen preparation. No significant differences were observed among all CoJet groups. In subgroups B and S, resin nano ceramics showed the highest bond strength. In feldspar groups, subgroup B showed higher bond strength than the other subgroups. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that lithium disilicate porcelain blocks required etching for repairing with composite material. Surface treatments did not increase the bond strength in feldspar ceramic groups and reduced the bond strength in resin nano ceramic groups.